(11-22-2017 01:21 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 12:32 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 12:19 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 11:55 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 11:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think that those on the extreme left (and the extreme right, too, for that matter) are so convinced of the superiority of their ideas that they cannot conceive how anyone could reasonably disagree, so any dissent must therefore be based upon some exogenous factor such as race or sex. Plus, it's a whole lot easier to argue against the exogenous factor than it is to debate the issues.

The fact that Obama is black, or that Hillary is a woman, are IMO their respective most attractive attributes. The fact that both embrace a collectivist/redistributionist domestic policy, which IMO leads inevitably to socialism/communism, which doesn't work, coupled with what often appears to be an "America last" foreign policy, disqualifies both of them from any active consideration on my part for any elective office.

The last presidential election was particularly difficult for me. I voted in the democrat primary, for Hillary, because I believed that her collectivism/socialism/communism was not nearly as far advanced as that of Bernie, whom I felt needed to be stopped. Then in the general, Trump was only slightly more attractive on the policy front--I agreed with him on more policies than I did with Hillary, but my biggest disagreements were over the policies he placed in the forefront--immigration and free trade. That plus his personality pretty much disqualified him as well. As I said at the time, I thought the best Trump could be was probably better than the best that Hillary could be, but the worst that he could be was worse. So I had them about even, with Trump having the higher beta. So far, Trump has been about the mid-range of what I expected, which puts his performance about the same on the good/bad scale as I expected from Hillary, with perhaps a slight uptick to Trump for Gorsuch.

I voted for Gary Johnson. "Aleppo" didn't concern me nearly as much as what I heard coming out of Trump's and Hillary's mouths on a daily basis. And still doesn't.

Trump tweeted this, this morning:

Quote: "It wasn't the White House, it wasn't the State Department, it wasn't father LaVar's so-called people on the ground in China that got his son out of a long term prison sentence - IT WAS ME. Too bad! LaVar is just a poor man's version of Don King, but without the hair. Just think LaVar, you could have spent the next 5 to 10 years during Thanksgiving with your son in China, but no NBA contract to support you. But remember LaVar, shoplifting is NOT a little thing. It's a really big deal, especially in China. Ungrateful fool!"

Is Trump incorrect on the facts?

Did Trump only state facts?

I'm only asking about the facts.

Did he intervene?
If so, did that result in saving jail time for those kids?

Ok, so we're both focusing on two different things here, and for obvious reasons.

You're looking just at the situation with the players and China. As of this moment, there is no evidence to suggest anything happened besides Trump personally requesting the release of the players. In this regard, Trump acted as a POTUS should.

I'm looking at how Trump is conducting himself post-event. At which point he is singling out a father from his bully pulpit, degrading him publicly, and throwing in some racially tinged language to boot. In this regard, Trump is acting FAR from how a POTUS should.

Had Trump just focused on the facts, which you so want to focus on, there would be nothing to comment on, really. He would have done his job as he should. Instead, just as he is want to do, Trump interjected some truly boorish thoughts and opinions on the situation.

So I guess I should at least give him a pat on the back for not lying about the situation?

But now my question for you, just because Trump was correct on the facts, does that mean we should gloss over the absolutely classes response that he had to Big Baller? Should we not try and hold our POTUS to a standard that is better than that tweet?